2 total
WhatsApp messages voluntarily exchanged between accused and complainant are not 'records' under s. 278.1.
The accused, charged with sexual assault and other offences against his wife, sought to adduce WhatsApp messages exchanged between them.
He brought an application for a ruling that the messages were not 'records' under s. 278.1 of the Criminal Code and thus not subject to the admissibility regime in s. 278.92.
The court first ruled that the Crown was not entitled to review the messages at the threshold stage to argue whether they constituted a record.
After reviewing the messages, the court held that the complainant did not have an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the messages, as they were voluntarily exchanged with the accused and were innocuous in nature.
Therefore, the messages were not 'records' and the accused was not required to bring an application under s. 278.93 before using them at trial.
The court dismissed robbery charges against a young person due to frailties in eyewitness and video identification evidence.
A young person was charged with robbery, breach of recognizance, and failure to comply with a condition of recognizance arising from an alleged robbery on June 17, 2018, in Toronto.
The Crown relied on identification evidence from the victim and "prior acquaintance recognition" evidence from a detective constable based on CCTV surveillance footage from two locations.
The trial judge found that the victim's identification was tentative and qualified, and that the detective's testimony, while admissible, was based on minimal prior familiarity with the accused and unsupported by the poor-quality video evidence.
The court concluded that the Crown failed to prove the identity of the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt and dismissed all counts.
